In a shocking display of insensitivity, not to mention gracelessness and incivility, Limbaugh accused actor Michael J. Fox, who carries on a daily battle with Parkinson’s disease, of exaggerating the symptoms of the disease in several political commercials for Democratic candidates:

To Rush Limbaugh on Monday, Michael J. Fox looked like a faker. The actor, who suffers from Parkinson’s disease, has done a series of political ads supporting candidates who favor stem cell research, including Maryland Democrat Ben Cardin, who is running against Republican Michael Steele for the Senate seat being vacated by Paul Sarbanes.

“He is exaggerating the effects of the disease,” Limbaugh told listeners. “He’s moving all around and shaking and it’s purely an act. . . . This is really shameless of Michael J. Fox. Either he didn’t take his medication or he’s acting.”

Limbaugh went on to say that it was the only time he had seen Fox exhibit symptoms of the disease and that “he could barely control himself.”

Limbaugh must have realized how extraordinarily stupid and insensitive his remarks were because he apologized for them later in the show. What possible good that did except highlight the broadcaster’s utter contempt for common decency is beyond me. Apologies don’t get it done in this case.

Perhaps Limbaugh should be sentenced to a class on how Parkinson’s progresses and what the afflicted must deal with every day just to get out of bed. Here’s a description of the disease from the National Institutes of Health:

The four primary symptoms of PD are tremor, or trembling in hands, arms, legs, jaw, and face; rigidity, or stiffness of the limbs and trunk; bradykinesia, or slowness of movement; and postural instability, or impaired balance and coordination. As these symptoms become more pronounced, patients may have difficulty walking, talking, or completing other simple tasks. PD usually affects people over the age of 50. Early symptoms of PD are subtle and occur gradually. In some people the disease progresses more quickly than in others. As the disease progresses, the shaking, or tremor, which affects the majority of PD patients may begin to interfere with daily activities. Other symptoms may include depression and other emotional changes; difficulty in swallowing, chewing, and speaking; urinary problems or constipation; skin problems; and sleep disruptions. There are currently no blood or laboratory tests that have been proven to help in diagnosing sporadic PD. Therefore the diagnosis is based on medical history and a neurological examination. The disease can be difficult to diagnose accurately. Doctors may sometimes request brain scans or laboratory tests in order to rule out other diseases.

Limbaugh’s reference to Fox being off medication fails to take into account that even if the patient is on one of the many drugs that help alleviate some of the symptoms of the disease, that each day is different for the Parkinson’s patient. Altering dosage as well as changing medication is a frequent necessity in order to allow the Parkinson’s sufferer to live something close to a “normal” life.

The left, of course, is having a field day with Limbaugh’s ignorant and ill tempered remarks as well they should. But perhaps they should also be wary of casting the first stone in this case. The shameless exploitation of people like Fox and the late Christopher Reeves in pushing embryonic stem cell research in a political context is dishonest, appealing as it does to a voter’s pity when the only basis for deciding whether such research should be funded by the government must be the quality of the science that could be achieved.

And in that case, there is much room for disagreement.

Speaking purely as a secularist, the scientific argument over the efficacy of using embryonic stem cells vs. adult stem cells (which, in fact, have no restrictions when it comes to funding), has yet to be resolved. In fact, the evidence suggests that even the so called “undifferentiated” embryonic stem cells supply little additional value to the cause of research given the enormous strides made in recent years using adult stem cells.

The scientific debate has taken a back seat to what many pro-life advocates see as using the fruits of abortion to advance human knowledge. While some of their arguments are compelling, the fact remains that under the law, an embryo is not a person and therefore can be treated as any other body part that is donated to the cause of science. Embryonic stem cell research is perfectly legal. The question is whether or not the government should fund it.

To determine whether or not our tax dollars should go toward this kind of research, the exact same criteria we use to decide whether to fund other scientific projects should be used. And in that respect, advocates for embryonic stem cell research have failed so far to make the case that using embryos is different than using adult tissue. It’s that simple. And for Democrats to play to the pity of voters by showing a wheel chair bound Christopher Reeves or a palsied Michael J. Fox and hint that if only those evil, mean, nasty Republicans could be defeated, Reeves would walk and Fox would be cured is nothing more than a disguised attack ad which uses a disgusting appeal to emotionalism. It is dishonest. It is exploitive. And Limbaugh was correct in calling attention to this shameless display of political tomfoolery.

But in typical Limbaugh fashion, the broadcaster had to go beyond the mundane kind of criticism levelled here and seek out controversy. It’s one of the reasons I stopped listening to him years ago. As his fame has increased, so too has his need to stand out. And sometimes – like yesterday – he goes too far out on the limb and he’s forced to make a hasty retreat.

Except in this case, the branch broke before he could scramble back to safety.

Limbaugh owes Fox more than an apology. If he were an honorable man, he would have Fox on his show to discuss the ravages of the disease and help his audience understand how cruel a life becomes when suffering from such a debilitating illness. Perhaps then, both Rush and his listeners will understand how truly despicable his comments about Fox were and why such a storm of condemnation has so righteously broken about his head.

By: Rick Moran at 6:23 am

38 Responses to “INSULTING THE EXPLOITED”

1

ed Said:
7:42 am

I don’t see one whole hell of a lot of difference between showing Fox’s palsy for political influence and repeated displays of the 9/11 attacks for political influence. Both sides shamelessly use tragedy to manipulate the emotions of voters. There is no high road here for either side. Any argument that the right or the left is any more noble in this example is pure, unmitigated bullshit. A pox on both their houses for such exploitation. And thanks Rick, for pointing out the bigoted, narcissistic prevaricator that is Rush Limbaugh.

2

Doug O'Leary Said:
8:25 am

I don’t often listen to Rush, but for some reason caught a good portion of this dialogue. The discussion of whether or not MJFox went off his meds for the drama seemed to me more of a side bar. The real question Rush was posing was is Amendment 2 to the Missouri constitution trying to codify a new right to human cloning vs the right to stem cell research as it’s given name suggests.

If, as Rush suggests, the ammendment has been misnamed, then its a blatant attempt at misdirection and should be lambasted far and wide – to include everyone associated with it, including MJFox. If it turns out not to be the case, then Rush Limbaugh should be lambasted for attempting to misdirect the conservative movement.

While I am personally all for research, I can certainly understand people’s concern about infant stem cells and where they come from. My concern in this particular debate is who’s lying and who’s telling the truth?

Guess I’m going to have to do some research and read the proposed amendment…

Awesome Rick…until one lives with PD and/or works with those who are inflicted with it, one needs to shut up!
It is a horrific disease that progresses into even worse states than most people can imagine.

Let’s put the namecalling aside on this stuff.

While there is room for political argument, I have no problem with MJF standing up for polcats who might support research that might offer him a cure.

4

longz Said:
8:49 am

Ed says: “I donâ€™t see one whole hell of a lot of difference between showing Foxâ€™s palsy for political influence and repeated displays of the 9/11 attacks for political influence.”

For starters, Michael Fox chose to go on tv himself while the victims of 9/11 were given no such choice.

For another, 9/11 was an event that both parties had agreed right after would not be politicized. Embryonic stem cell research has been a political issue from the start: Pro-life people believe stem cells should be incinerated, while pro-research people believe they should be used in research first and then, if necessary, incinerated.

5

Doug O'Leary Said:
9:01 am

OK; that was easier than I thought it was going to be.

The argument seems to be whether or not Somatic Cell Nuclear Transer (SCNT) is cloning if the resulting blasocyst is not implanted in a uterus. A similar argument to when is a fetus human – at fertilization or birth…

The amendment defines human cloning as SCNT and implantation of the resulting blasocyst in a uterus.

It specifically allows SCNT for purpose of stem cell research but prohibits implantation of the blasocyst into a uterus.

So, is that cloning?

The other part of the argument is whether or not the MS govt would have to fund it. I can’t find anything stating that the state govt would have to fund the research so that seems to be a red herring.

I found another link that basically said this was cloning and that it was going to be state funded. Unfortunately, I can’t find that link anymore although there appear to be a healthy number of “vote no” sites should anyone else care to do the research.

That’s obviously my interpretation. I’ve found it helpful in these arguments of what a document says to actually go read the thing.

As to the Rush Limbaugh/Michael J. Fox argument: it’s a matter of interpretation. Is SCNT cloning if the resulting blasocyst is not implanted in a uterus? My question is why is a constitutional amendment needed? Are there proposed laws banning such research?

Hope that clarifies the issue a little for people…

Doug O’Leary

6

Nelle Said:
9:04 am

Actually, this pro-life person believes embryos with their stem cells intact should be in women’s uteruses. It’s so natural and all. “Extra” embryos that won’t be implanted should not be made. Those that have been made should be given for implantation if someone wants them, and respectfully buried or incinerated if not. There, now you may attack the actual pro-life position.

7

longz Said:
9:39 am

Okeydoke, Nelle. So along with incineration, you are also ok with the cells being buried. And whether they’re buried or incinerated, the 256 cell cluster should be disposed of “respectfully” and not be used to develop anything that could save other lives. No need for me to attack your position, Nelle. It’s reasonableness speaks for itself.

8

ed Said:
10:26 am

longz:

Did you read what I said? Neither Michael J. Fox’s actions or the 9/11 victims actions are under discussion. My point was that both political parties have used tragedy for political gain. Nothing you said undermines that point. 9/11 images were certainly used in political ads, regardless of what was agreed to. Visual images of people’s illnesses have been used for emotional impact just as well. Embryonic stem cell research has shown so little promise up to this point, I oppose federal funding of such projects and am appalled at debilitated famous people being used to shill for political support. By the same token, huckstering by those in favor or opposing the Iraq War with the emotions of “let’s roll” sloganeering or the searing images of 9/11 to say “vote for me”, or “I’m a poor 9/11 widow so listen to me” is an equally nasty piece of business.

9

Ali Said:
10:32 am

Doug, thanks for the link, very informative.

MJF has been to the same symposiums and conferences I have; As someone who has family members and friends with PD I know the search for hope. He’s heard researchers for and against ESC tell him it doesn’t work. He also knows of the two studies in NY where someone died from the tumors… the growth can’t be controlled. This is what gets me upset.

He knows ESC’s cause tumors and are a no go. He knows what’s working now, and has put money into it.

We know Talent and Steele are for ASC research and did not (as said in the ad), vote against ‘stem cell research’, they are against ESC research. He may have been told that, but his foundation should have known this already.

This research is available in the two states already.

I refuse to get into the dem contributions and Specter’s, make of that what you will.

It’s wrong to push this to people when you know otherwise.
The democrats should be ashamed of themselves as well.

People need to read this bill and the language within; We have been fighting it for years and know how they’ve changed it.

The last thing it would do is help PD patients.
It’s the beginning of the Groningen Protocol.

10

longz Said:
11:07 am

Ed,

Ed,

No, there’s a big difference. For Michael Fox, the tragedy is his own, to do with as he wishes. The fact that he wants to let people see what his disease is about is not a matter of exploitation or “being used to shill,” since he has total control over how he is portrayed. 9/11, on the other hand, was a tragedy belonging to the victims and to our country.

Your next point, “Embryonic stem cell research has shown so little promise up to this point” is very funny. Does this mean you think scientific research is useless if it hasn’t shown results already? No wonder there’s a Republican war on science.

11

sauropod Said:
12:17 pm

Ali got it right in pointing out that embryonic stem cells have an alarming tendency to cause teratomas (tumors). The reason is that such cells, which have not yet become specialized, are pluripotent – they can develop into any sort of tissue at all. When embryonic stem cells are injected into animal or human test subjects, they frequently multiply out of control, in unpredictable ways, producing such grotesqueries as lumps of hair and teeth inside the subject’s body. Sometimes the lab animals are killed for purposes of autopsy before the tumors have had a chance to develop, but when allowed to live out a more normal lifespan, the animals almost always exhibit this side effect.

So-called adult stem cells (which can come either from adult tissue or from umbilical cord blood) do not have the same tendency to produce tumors. This is the main reason that researchers, even in countries without restrictions on funding, are concentrating their efforts on adult stem cells. They simply hold out greater promise.

Unfortunately, any stem-cell cure is probably decades away, and is very unlikely to help any current sufferers of Parkinson’s or other diseases.

12

Bruce Said:
1:00 pm

Rick, I have to disagree with you on this one, as I listened to Rush the past three days and heard what he said about this subject. Rush is basicaly saying that MJF has the right to say anything he wants, he even has the right to be dead wrong, but does not have immunity from criticism of the FACTS of what he is saying. Rush also mentioned that Fox has wrtitten in his own book of how he purposly goes off his medications when he has appeared in front of Congress in order to dramatize his illness. Rush was challanging the FACTS of what Fox was saying, not making fun of him.

Rick, you have to be careful of not falling into the same trap the “old media” keeps demonstrating to us each day: the repetition of something you hear that fits a particular bias without researching the facts.

13

Bob Zimmerman Said:
1:20 pm

M. Fox can’t lie just because he is sick. He can but he might have to answer for it. He is trying to get someone elected. So he jumped into the fire.

Rush made a point today. He is deaf. Can people say anything about him? Is Rush free from criticism since he has a medical problem?

14

Dan Bostan Said:
1:23 pm

I disagree.
Rush is right, and he constructed his argument very well.
The demsheviks need to be called when they lie and mislead.
As Ann Coulter says, using “infallible victims” is a known liberal tactic.

15

Mitzi Said:
1:26 pm

Hey Rick, I think you have gone off the deep end over this and need to come down off your moral high horse!(Gulp, I can’t believe I wrote that). Did you listen to the recording of Rush making this statement? He had never seen Fox like that, and speculated tht Fox was either acting(his profession), or off his meds. His staff then informed him that they had seen Fox like that before, so Limbaugh apologized. As it turns out, Fox himself said that he manipulated his meds to exaggerate his symptoms so as to influence other people. Fox is a big boy who knew exactly what he was doing when he chose to use his disease to campaign for Democrats. Just because he has an illness he is not immune to speculation or criticism. Why isn’t the Limbaugh apology good enough? I think thaat the MSM is going overboard on this to hurt Republicans. And then there’s the subject of the accuracy and honesty of the ad. There’s certainly room for critism and a debunking there, although you won’t hear anything about that in the MSM. This reminds me of how I thought you over-reacted to the Olberman fake anthrazx scare. I like to think I’m a caring compassionate person, but I sure don’t see it your way.

16

longz Said:
1:58 pm

Bob says: “Rush made a point today. He is deaf. Can people say anything about him? Is Rush free from criticism since he has a medical problem?”

Even more to the point, Rush has another serious medical problem that people do, in fact, often make fun of – his drug addictions.

But if Rush were to make an ad advocating for treatment of drug addiction, I think people would be way out of line to say he was simply exaggerating his problem. And if, say, Al Franken offered an apology along the lines of “If I was wrong, then I’m sorry,” most people would doubt the sincerity of his apology.

17

Sweetie Said:
2:31 pm

Limbaugh went too far when he speculated that Fox may have gone off his meds for the commerical or, worse, acted. HOWEVER, if he’s correct that in Fox’s book he admitted to skipping meds before testifying to Congress then Fox has a history of deception…..which only goes as far as Fox should be asked if he’s still going off meds in order to make his political appearances more impactful.

I know when I’m being manipulated (or someone is attempting to manipulate me) by celebrity, sexuality etc. The degree of manipulation is no less if Fox is punching up his appearances and far worse there is no way to tell if this is going on. If he wants to enter the political arena, fine, but I think he has some splaining to do.

18

SShiell Said:
4:15 pm

To me the case is simple and it has nothing to do with the desease MJF is suffering from, whether he is or is not on his meds – it has everything to do with the use of â€œinfallible victimsâ€ in politics.

Cindy Sheehan, Michael J Fox, the 9/11 Widows – anyone who stands up in support of a political agenda is fair game. To question whether MJF was acting or off his meds in order to make a political point is a reasonable question. Let him answer it. And let him support his rationale for doing so. His affliction does not make him bullet proof.

It reminds me of a warning my grandfather once gave me: “Be careful when you take the moral high ground. All that heavenly backlighting makes you an outstanding target.”

Limbaugh must have realized how extraordinarily stupid and insensitive his remarks were because he apologized for them later in the show.

I guess you didn’t read the whole article.

21

Vulgorilla Said:
5:53 pm

“To question whether MJF was acting or off his meds in order to make a political point is a reasonable question.”

I totally agree! MJF specifically used his disease to make a political point, and so has removed his “body armor” in the ensuing political debate. Questions now concerning his disease, his motivation for doing the ad, his politics, etc. are, IMHO, all fair game. If he didn’t want to be shot at, he shouldn’t have entered the fight.

IT IS ALWAYS DANGEROUS TO USE THE WASHINGTON POST FOR EVENHANDED REPORTAGE. REVIEW WHAT FOX SAID IN THE COMMERCIALS. HE CONFLATED EMBRYONIC AND ADULT STEMCELL RESEARCH TO SIMPLY STEMCELL RESEARCH. THAT HE HAS A DEVASTATING DESEASE DOES NOT INOCULATE HIM FROM LEGITIMATE CRITICISM ABOUT WHAT HE SAID.

We have only to think back to: Donovan McNabb. I think everytime he excels in a game, Ruch Limbaugh gets torn a new one.

I am sure Fox and Limbaugh are grown-ups, though, and if I were to say something like, “HEY!! .... RRRRR-UUUUSSSHHH!!... WHAAA-AT ARRRE YEE-OUUUUU???!! ... DEAF OR SOMETHING??!!” he could take it. I hope Fox can, too. It’s that whole public figure thing.

24

Mark H. Said:
12:29 am

I happened to have Rush on the radio this week (I used to listen to him regularly back in the day, but not so much in the past few years), and frankly, Rick, this is one of the few times I disagree with your take on any given issue.

I think too, though, that you’ll be modifying your position once you gather all the relevant information, as opposed to relying on what is said, 2nd-partially-hand, about what he said.

25

syn Said:
7:30 am

Did you actually listen to what Rush said? OR, did you simply accept what MSM said what Rush said?

I admit that before I began actually listening to Rush just two years ago the only thing I ever heard about Rush was that he was some right-wing extremist out to destroy the country.

Correction regarding your scientific defintion of embryo, the government has determined that an embryo is considered a person when She needs federally funded pre-natal care and is considered a non-person when She chooses to suck it out with a vacumn cleaner or shoots herself in the abdomen just minutes before ‘it’ moves through the birth canal. Confusing the definition even further is that if He were to do anything to bring harm to ‘it’ He would tried for murder while She would be considered an innocent bystander.

26

syn Said:
7:33 am

“As soon as man began considering himself the highest meaning in the world and the measure of everything, the world began to lose its human dimension, and man began to lose control of it” Vaclav Havel

Second, doctors asked about this have said MJF was ON his meds when he did the interview. The meds cause the palsy. If he hadn’t been on them, he would have been more rigid. The brouhaha about him not taking the meds b/4 Congress was 5+ years away, when the rigidness would not have been noticable but the shaking would have been.

And Rush is completely wrong about MJF never being this bad. I’ve seen him at awards ceremonies and the like, and he has ranged from being in complete control, to starting to have problems with shaking, to all-out palsy like the ad had.

I would like to see Rush’s actual apology, though. Most of what I’ve read has him saying:

“So I will bigly, hugely admit that I was wrong, and I will apologize to Michael J. Fox if I am wrong in characterizing his behavior on this commercial as an act, especially since people are telling me they have seen him this way on other interviews and in other television appearances.”

...and then the next day saying…

“I think what they’re going to focus on is my statement yesterday that he was either acting or off his medications when he was doing these commercials. It turns out he was off his medication. He was not acting, but he was off his medication, and he has admitted in his own book that he goes off medication before Senate Appropriations Committee hearings and the like in order to illustrate the ravages of the disease.”

And how do we know MJF was off his meds, as Rush states he was? Did MJF say he was?

28

the Dragon Said:
1:18 pm

Well, the Democrats have found a winner in 2008. None other than Michael J. Fox (I’m sure his Canadian birth can be overlooked).

If you disagree with him, well that’s not allowed. You say he is constitutionally challenged bue to birth, his disability trumps that.

I learn something every day.

29

Brian Said:
1:46 pm

the Dragon:

So, saying MJF is faking his palsy or not taking his drugs to make his disease worse is the same thing as factual criticism of a position?

Okay.

You, poster, are a unicorn porn addict, and were probably writing your entry in between searches of “horny horns” and “forehead foreplay”.

Oh, but if I’m wrong, I’ll apologize. Maybe.

There – I’ve critiqued your position and made a vague promise to be big if I’m wrong.

30

SAHMmy Said:
6:48 pm

Rush got a main point right, and that is the Stem Cell debate is about Abortion primarily.

It always comes back to the Holy Grail of democrats: abortions for everyone.

MJFox did not decide to jump into the discussion of Stem Cell Research.. That was a side issue.

He was an advocate for two or three Liberal POLITICAL Senatorial candidates.

When he became politically active he is now a politician and he’d better be willing to take criticism.

He nor any other “disabled” politician is immune to being called on his performance and policies.

ExP(Jack)

32

Franco Said:
4:07 am

Shouldn’t we use all the tools we have available. TheD emocrats aren’t the first to politicize stem cell research,Republicans opposed it they are doing it to please their constituents. Republicans arne’t opposed to politicizing stem cell research only when it is turning out to be a losing issue. Indeed life long Republicans and pro lifers like former Mo. Senator John Danforth and Nancy Reagan have supported stem cell research. If there are cures I would support those morally opposed to not be treated. How could Michael Fox been deceptive anyway? He has a progressive neurological disease that while going up and down has a down ward trend and the commerical depicts the consequences of Parkinson. Whether on that particular day MJF did or didn’t take medication the future for him is grim and the commericial depicts that. Limbaugh is no expert in Parkinson’s and even if he was, he has no access to MJF’s medical records or given him an exam. He in essence attempted to diagnose Fox’s medical condition and the state of his medication by long distance. I’ve yet to see a medical professional describe MJF as faking or displaying anything that is outside the range of normal behavior for Parkinson’s at this stage. All Limbaugh can say is Fox might be tinkering with his meds, but he has no evidence.In a debate about scientic research No one promises a cure from stem cell research and eventually if there are no benfits to stem cell research the point will be mute. Most of the embryonic material is taken from “leftover” fetuses from fertility treatments and are the property of the patients to implant, donate or destroy as they see fit. If they chose not to donate their material for research as far as I know they can be made to donate it. If on the other had they want to destroy it there is no law currently to stop it. Limbaugh is a convicted drug addict that never learned humility. I don’t dislike him for being conservative, conservatives do have points. He is a thug who argues no moral, intelligent person can ever oppose conservatism. There is always some flaw in liberal critics according to Limbaugh. I can accept someone liking conservative philosophy but a conservative should admit the possibility of dumb chance liberals would have to be right sometime. Nor does he speak for all conservatives let alone independts and liberals.

33

Harriett Said:
11:14 am

It continuously amazes me how right wingers are so quick to cry ‘foul’ that folks like MJ Fox are ‘exploited’. Funny…I don’t remember ANYONE complaining about MJFox making a commercial for ARLEN SPECTER just two years ago. As usual, it’s only the Democrats who ‘exploit’, huh? Aren’t wingers tired of constantly defending their irrationality???

34

the Dragon Said:
6:44 pm

Brian,

I hope you never say something which get’s snipped to make it something it is not.

And, I realize that context is nothing.

Yet, your point still stands. MJF is untouchable. No matter what he does, or what he says, he gets a pass because we all feel soooo sorry for him.

I like(ed) MJF, contributed to Parkinsons research due to his condition and the attention it brought to the disease. My grandfather had Parkinsons. He died 35+ years ago when I was a teenager. I do not know how much the Parkinsons had with his death because he was 76 when he died.

I understand why MJF did what he did, and if he was just doing a Public Service Announcement, no arguement from me. Yet, That’s not what MJF did, he entered the political arena and his message is that If you vote for Jim Tallent, and today here in Maryland, if you vote for Michael Steele, you are for causing suffering and against cures for diseases.

Brian, you and MJF can charge me with that, and apparently I DO NOT have the right to call you on it.

I understood what Rush was trying to say and I know how anxious many MSM outlets are to make an issue of anything he says but it still seems like Rush handed everyone another distraction from the real issue of the Missouri Amendment 2 initiative. Rush did articulate that but most people who heard about it as a news story won’t be reading Rush’s transcripts for clarity.

36

the Dragon Said:
10:28 pm

Jon, you might be correct, yet the people who are going to be offended, are ALWAYS going to be offended when Rush’s name comes up.

The interesting thing is that Rush does a RADIO show. Yes he has the “ditto cam” for his 24/7 subscribers, which I have always found interesting. I guess it appeals to alot of people who are more visually comfortable, while radio is obiously an auditory medium.

Rush mentioned that he was describing what he saw. I can understand that, as the lady of the house or I will often burst into laughter watching the other talking on the telephone, using our hands or facial expressions to get our points across to the person at the other end of the line (who CANNOT see us).

37

Phonics 4 dummies Said:
2:47 pm

Rush put his foot in his mouth…again. Why is it so hard to just admit that? What obscures the legit questions and or postions he may raise is the rhetorical posture he adopts. It appears he goes out of his way to be a bull in a china shop, whether it’s the McNabb snafu, Michael Fox, or some of the more over the top comments he made during the Terry Schivao media circus – one wonders if he actively looks for and provokes this kind of controversy.

38

Phonics 4 dummies Said:
2:51 pm

Samhy

so all the Republicans who are pro-choice, yes they exist, are really Dems in diguise huh? Those are RINO’s right?

—————————————————————————————“Rush got a main point right, and that is the Stem Cell debate is about Abortion primarily.

It always comes back to the Holy Grail of democrats: abortions for everyone.”
—————————————————————————————